First, I consider myself to be a libertarian socialist, but I'm not advocating for revolution or anything like that. I think it's perfectly reasonable to pursue increased liberty and increased equality from within the current system, allowing for the possibility of gradual changes without causing social instability.
Now, the issue I would like to discuss here is private property. I'm just going to rant a bit and hopefully through discussing the issue I will be able to clarify my own thoughts and position.
It seems to me that hoarding of private property is the source of the most extreme forms of inequality (in the western world anyways). I'm thinking of the way banks accumulate enormous sums of money, and the massive amount of wealth funneled up through conglomerate corporations that own companies and manufacturing, but are not even remotely connected to production or managerial processes of the companies they profit from. Even copyright laws, which allow companies to own and therefore profit from the work of others (how many musicians and artists have lost the right to their own work?).
- Is it right to own something (preventing others from using it) even when you are not using it?
-Should people be able to inherit the wealth of their parents (even though they didn't work for it?).
Why should land developers be able to profit so much by acquiring what is often public land, and selling homes built by labourers who have no property rights to the things they build? If there was no private property, why would workers ever sell themselves to a company (making the company rich, but merely supporting him/herself)?
My alternative: Possession
The concept of the right to posssession is different from the right to private property. It does not allow people to own more than they can reasonably use, nor does it allow one person or group of persons to own land that they are not currently using. Ownership is determined by possession of something and when you cease to possess something (for a long enough time anyways), you lose your right to own it. This would also mean that if a building was abandoned and someone else wanted to possess it, they could do so freely.
Anyways, there is a lot of food for thought in there so....
....What do you think?
↓ Show Details
